Well, they did it. NOLA is cigar unfriendly

[TommyBB]

I know it.
I guess we'll all be sitting outside sweating in the parks, or on the steps at Washington Artillery Park.

[bigw]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

the IPCPR got 'exempted', but, if the IPCPR is really standing up for smokers rights, they should pull out immediately and go to Atlanta, birmingham, or some place like that.

+1

[tonycsmoke]

Originally Posted by grtrx

without knowing what the 20% really means ( total net profit? margin? total revenues? gaming revenues?) no real way of knowing what will happen until it happens.

The 20% is revenue. The year after Illinois banned smoking they had a 24% drop. A Federal Reserve study pegged the smoking ban for nearly all the losses. Typically, the government gets a pretty good cut from the revenue, not the profit. It really depends on what the smoking percentage of the customers, how close is a smoking allowed facility and will smoking tourist still go.

[TommyBB]

Originally Posted by tonycsmoke

The 20% is revenue. The year after Illinois banned smoking they had a 24% drop. A Federal Reserve study pegged the smoking ban for nearly all the losses. Typically, the government gets a pretty good cut from the revenue, not the profit. It really depends on what the smoking percentage of the customers, how close is a smoking allowed facility and will smoking tourist still go.

Tony, there's no similar place anywhere near there. Of course, in New Orleans, near is somewhat relative. From Harrah's at the foot of Canal Street out to the Treasure Chest is a 20 minute DRIVE most of the time, except afternoon drive.

[tonycsmoke]

Originally Posted by TommyBB

Tony, there's no similar place anywhere near there. Of course, in New Orleans, near is somewhat relative. From Harrah's at the foot of Canal Street out to the Treasure Chest is a 20 minute DRIVE most of the time, except afternoon drive.

Well if you want to smoke while you gamble....most smokers will make that drive. Part of the loss is in actual visits. The other part is that smokers get up from gambling to go outside. They may rethink what they are doing and walk away. Whatever the reason, it will be nearly immediate. They will see the revenue drop the very first day. We have several Casinos in the area, half of them are in Illinois that banned smoking everywhere years ago. All of them took major hits from day one. It fact, they have all been a downward trajectory since 2008.

[TommyBB]

Originally Posted by tonycsmoke

Well if you want to smoke while you gamble....most smokers will make that drive. Part of the loss is in actual visits. The other part is that smokers get up from gambling to go outside. They may rethink what they are doing and walk away. Whatever the reason, it will be nearly immediate. They will see the revenue drop the very first day. We have several Casinos in the area, half of them are in Illinois that banned smoking everywhere years ago. All of them took major hits from day one. It fact, they have all been a downward trajectory since 2008.

Mississippi is wringing its hands with glee, waiting for this.

[TommyBB]

Annnnnnnnnnd the jackass mayor just signed it.
What a worthless idiot. We're 600 police men short of a full police force, although murder is down, some, crime is worse. He's trying to get Louisiana State Police to abandon the rest of the state to bolster the NOPD which is HIS responsibility....but damn it, NO SMOKING.

[Coach]

Ohio has been smoke free for some time now. We also have 3 Casino's and 2 Racinos. NO SKOKING except OUTSIDE( note both Thistledown and Hard Rockcino has installed OUTSIDE GAMING AREAS) where smokers can enjoy.

[TommyBB]

Originally Posted by Coach

Ohio has been smoke free for some time now. We also have 3 Casino's and 2 Racinos. NO SKOKING except OUTSIDE( note both Thistledown and Hard Rockcino has installed OUTSIDE GAMING AREAS) where smokers can enjoy.

And freeze, no doubt.

[tonycsmoke]

Originally Posted by TommyBB

And freeze, no doubt.

There is truth in smoking bans don't hurt as much in warmer climates. An economic study (done by a Professor of Nursing) proved that the smoking ban didn't hurt smoking ban in the Twin Cities. It was used to help pass the statewide ban in Minnesota. No need to look at the fine print. In order to get the results they wanted, they simply took out the September to April numbers out of the results. It seems that those were unavailable for 3 years straight.

Truthfully even though economics done by economist bolster our argument. It really comes down to a loss of freedom.

What's even better....take a look at the most righteous of the anti-smokers. They tend to be fat and out of shape. I still remember this 400 pound 5 foot 2 women wagging her finger at me. Scolding me because cigars were very, very bad. How that since there wasn't a smoking ban that she felt her life was in danger every time she went into a restaurant because smoking could be happening.